View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Utility of SyndromicMolecular Panels for Infectious Disease Testing
Ted E. Schutzbank, PhD, D(ABMM)
Laboratory Director
Quantigen LLC
Syndromic Infectious Disease Panels
• Detection of organisms specific to distinct syndromes
• Respiratory infections• Gastrointestinal infections• CNS disease• Sepsis• Urinary tract infections (UTI)• Women’s health• Sexually transmitted infections (STI)
• Test panels are not restricted to a specific organism type
• Bacteria• Viruses• Fungi• Parasites
Syndromic ID panels – Major Advantages
• Increased diagnostic yield to multiple targets from a single available sample
• Conserve and optimize analysis of rare and difficult samples (e.g. CSF)
• Simplify ordering algorithm• Streamline workflow in the laboratory
while reducing hands-on time• Consolidation of multiple flows into a single
method• reduces turn-around time and
labor/reagent/supply costs
• Savings compared to testing for organisms in individual assays
• Standardization of testing
Adapted from E. Palavecino, AACC Clin Lab News, April 1, 2015
Syndromic ID Panels –HistoricalChallenges
• False positive results due to cross reactivity or non-specific amplification caused by multiple primers/targets in the reaction
• False negative results due to preferential amplification of one target over another
• Added cost of testing for inappropriate target organisms
• High cost of commercial kits and instruments
Adapted from E. Palavecino, AACC Clin Lab News, April 1, 2015
Commercially Available
Syndromic tests
Respiratory Disease
Ramanan et al, Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 31: 1 – 28, 2018)
Respiratory Syndromic Testing
in the ED –Outcomes Study
Arch Pathol Lab Med 139, 636-641, 2015
Respiratory Syndromic
Testing in the ED –
Outcomes Study
• Mean time to the test result was shorter (6.4 hours versus 18.6 hours)
• The percentage of patients having a diagnostic test result in the emergency department was greater (51.6% versus 13.4%)
• There was no difference in whether antibiotics were prescribed, but the duration of antibiotic use was shorter
• dependent on receiving test results within 4 hours
• If the test result was positive, the inpatient length of stay (P = .03) and the time in isolation (P = .03) were decreased
• Overall conclusion: Use of panel basedrespiratory PCR testing in the ED decreases the duration of antibiotic use, the length of inpatient stay, and the time in isolation.
Commercially Available
Syndromic Panels
GI Infections
Ramanan et al, Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 31: 1 – 28, 2018)
Current Commercially
Available Syndromic
PanelsGI Infections
cont.
BD MAX™ ENTERIC BACTERIAL PANEL
Salmonella spp.
Shigella spp./EIEC,
Campylobacter spp. (jejuni and coli)
Shiga toxin-producing organisms (STEC, Shigella
dysenteriae)
BD MAX™ EXTENDED ENTERIC BACTERIAL
PANEL
Yersinia enterocolitica
Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC)
Plesiomonas shigelloides
Vibrio(V. vulnuficus/ V. parahaemolyticus/V.
cholerae)
BD MAX™ Enteric Parasite Panel
Giardia lamblia
Cryptosporidium spp. (C. parvum and C. hominis)
Entamoeba histolytica
BD MAX™ ENTERIC VIRAL PANEL
Norovirus
Rotavirus
Adenovirus (40/41)
Sapovirus
Human Astrovirus
Panel Based Gastrointestinal
PCR Testing: Clinical
Outcomes
Clinical Infectious Diseases, ciy357, https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciy357
Improved Detection by Gastrointestinal Syndromic Panel PCR Compared to Conventional Testing
Cybulski et al
Cybulski et al Study Results
• A total of 1887 consecutive fecal specimens were tested in parallel by Gastrointestinal Panel PCR (GIPCR) and stool culture.
• GIPCR detected pathogens in 35.3% of specimens, compared to 6.0% for culture
• GIPCR allowed increased recognition of coinfections
• Median time from collection to result was 18 hours for GIPCR and 47 hours for culture
• Median time from collection to initiation of antimicrobial therapy was 22 hours for GIPCR and 72 hours for culture.
• Patients diagnosed by GIPCR were more likely to receive targeted rather than empirical therapy, compared to those diagnosed by culture (P = .0148)
• Positive Shiga-like toxin-producing E. coli results were reported 47 hours faster with GIPCR and facilitated discontinuation of empirical antimicrobials
PCR Panels -Blood Culture Applications
Ramanan et al, Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 31: 1 – 28, 2018)
PCR Panels -Blood Culture
Patient Outcomes
Mortality outcomes with molecular rapid diagnostic
testing (mRDT) versus conventional testing in bloodstream infection
Odds ratios (ORs) were determined with
the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects method.
Abbreviations:ASP, antimicrobial stewardship program
CI, confidence interval.
Timbrook et al, CID 2017:64, 15-23
Advantages and Disadvantages Current Commercially Marketed Testing Platforms/Tests
• Advantages• Standardized systems needing minimal effort to
set up• Established test performance characteristics• Rapid turn-around time• Simple to use “sample to answer” format• Moderate complexity
• Disadvantages• High cost per patient test• Locked into target organisms selected by the
manufacturer• Appropriateness of target organisms chosen by
the manufacturer• Scalability
Why Custom Syndromic Arrays?
• Flexibility• You test for only those molecular targets that are
appropriate for your laboratory
• Higher throughput• Multiple patient samples can be tested per array
• Sample number depends on number of molecular targets on the array
• Lower per patient cost per test
Why Custom Syndromic Arrays?
BV Open Array Panel Target Organisms
Pathogenic Commensal lactobacilli
Atopobium vaginae Lactobacillus crispatus
BVAB2* Lactobacillus gasseri
Gardnerella vaginalis Lactobacillus iners Lactobacillus iners
Megasphaera 1 Lactobacillus jensenii Lactobacillus jensenii
Megasphaera 2 Lactobacillus jensenii
Mobiluncus curtisii
Mobiluncus mulieris
Mycoplasma hominis
Prevotella bivia
Ureaplasma urealyticum
*Bacterial Vaginosis–Associated Bacterium type 2
Jarvis et al.
BV Open Array Panel Target Organisms
Jarvis et al.
Example of a Custom Panel: Women’s Health Testing
“Thermo Fisher Scientific and its affiliates are not endorsing, recommending, or promoting any use or application of Thermo Fisher Scientific products presented by third parties during this seminar. Information and materials presented or provided by third parties are provided as-is and without warranty of any kind, including regarding intellectual property rights and reported results. Parties presenting images, text and material represent they have the rights to do so. “
Application of OpenArray real-time PRC technology in
Vaginal Microbiota Investigations
Sandeep Mukherjee, PhD
Scientific Director, Women’s Health & Infectious Diseases,
PathGroup
Disclosure
• For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures
• Thermo Fisher Scientific and its affiliates are not endorsing, recommending, or promoting any
use or application of Thermo Fisher Scientific products presented by third parties during this
seminar. Information and materials presented or provided by third parties are provided as-is
and without warranty of any kind, including regarding intellectual property rights and
reported results. Parties presenting images, text and material represent they have the rights to
do so.
Disclaimer
• Microbiomes in health and disease– Vaginal microbiota: finely balanced mutualistic association
– Indigenous bacterial communities prevent colonization by pathogenic
organisms
– concept of normal versus abnormal microbiota
– humans coexist with complex bacterial communities that are relatively
unique to specific niches such as the gastrointestinal tract and the oral
cavity
– Impact in human health
• Symptomatic/asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis, yeast infections, STI, UTI
Overview
• Culture has been inadequate (>99% cannot be cultivated)
• 16S rRNA gene sequencing
• Unprecedented detail, ID low abundance taxa
• Cpn60, rpoC, uvrB, RecA
• Several distinct vaginal communities with different species
composition
– Variation in different ethnic groups
• Differences in species composition correlate with response to
“disturbances”
Overview
• Inflammation of the vagina; discharge, itching and pain (11 million office
visits per year)
– Bacterial vaginosis: associated with an altered microbial flora (absence of gross
appearance of inflammation)
– Vulvovaginal candidiasis: caused by naturally occurring fungus of Candida spp.
• 2nd most common cause of vaginitis symptoms
– Trichomonal vaginitis: sexually transmitted parasite Trichomonas vaginalis
– Aerobic vaginitis: Depletion of healthy Lactobacillus species with aerobic pathogens,
mostly of intestinal origin
– Vaginal atrophy (atrophic vaginitis): reduced estrogen levels after menopause
– Overlapping symptoms
Vaginitis
Shift in vaginal flora from homogeneous, lactobacillus dominated state to a
heterogeneous, complex population of anaerobic & microaerophilic organisms -
Polybacterial dysbiosis
– Upper genital tract infections
– Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (PID)
– Adverse pregnancy outcomes
– Increased risk of STI
CDC:
– most commonly reported microbiological syndrome among women of childbearing age
– 15% to 50% of vaginitis/vaginosis depending upon the patient population
– Prevalence: 29.2%, among women ages 14 to 49
– 84% of women with BV do not report symptoms
Bacterial Vaginosis
• Hallmark of healthy vagina; dominant vaginal bacterial species in majority of
women
• Vaginal pH ~3.5 to 4.5, lactic acid production through fermentation
• Protection against non-commensal & potentially pathogenic organisms
• Distribution of Lactobacillus dominated community types varies among
different ethnicities
• 20% to 30% of asymptomatic healthy women lack significant numbers of
Lactobacillus spp.
Lactobacillus spp.
• Aerobic Vaginitis
– Escherichia coli, Group B Streptococcus, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis
– Localized vaginal inflammatory immune response
– Confused with common vaginitis etiologies
– 4.3% to 7.9% women attending vaginitis clinics were found to have moderate to severe
symptoms of AV
• Genital Ulcer
– Young, sexually active patients with genital, anal, or perianal ulcers
– Genital herpes (HSV-1/HSV-2)
– Syphillis (Treponema pallidum)
– Chancroid (Haemophilus ducreyi)
– Chlamydia trachomatis
– Differentiate from non-sexually acquired genital ulceration
Related panels
• Conventional microbiological approaches – limited utility
• Quantitative/semi-quantitative PCR for BV diagnosis
– Lack of standardization (different marker organisms, different thresholds)
– Limited number of organisms
• Need for a multi-variate analysis of BV associated marker
organisms
– Microbiome?
Rationale
• Custom panel/s based on clinical association and potential utility
• Consolidation of targets
• Flexibility
• Sensitive, specific, rapid
• Detection of BV, non-BV targets
• Variability of specimen collection, multiplicity of targets
Potential Utility
– “Pan-bacteria” control
– Normalization to standardize results
– Integrated interpretation – “normal", "borderline”,
“abnormal”
– ThinPrep or BD Universal Swab
Highlights
• OpenArray Digital PCR plates
– 48 subarrays; 64 through-holes/subarray
– 3,072 individual real-time PCR assays in parallel on
a single OpenArraay
– 4 arrays can be run at the same time (12,288
assays)
– 33 nL reaction volume
– Hydrophilic interior & external hydrophobic
coatings
• 48 specimen per OpenArray
– 192 specimens per run (6 hours)
– 26 organisms per specimen
• Simple workflow
OpenArray from Life Technologies
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
Assay Workflow
DNA isolation
Load samples
Apply lid and fill
Cycle, image, analyze data
Automated liquid handling
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
• relative quantitative data for each organisms by comparing to total bacterial
load
– Internal control
• Compared this data in symptomatic/asymptomatic subjects
• statistically determined cut-offs based on a bimodal distribution of the data
to determine normal versus elevated levels
• Statistical analyses to identify patterns of clustering of organisms between
symptomatic/asymptomatic status
• reference lab results for comparison
• samples from our routine screening population
Assay design/Verification
Statistical Clustering
Heat map representation/cluster analysis
probability of being symptomatic, observed symptomatic status and observed covariates, as predicted
by Probability model
Six separate groups, based on composition of the bacterial communities
• Prediction of symptomatic status– Specificity: 88.5%
– Sensitivity: 90.1%
• Analytical Sensitivity:
– ThinPrep: 1.5 X 104 - 7.5 X 103 targets/ml
– Swab: 2.5 – 5.0 X 104 targets/ml
• Specificity: ~100%
Technical Specifications
BV+ Abnormal Report
BV+ Performance
>150,000 subjects tested
Normal = 60.3%
Borderline = 10.2%
Abnormal = 29.5%
CDC Statistics
Prevalence estimated at 21.2 million (29.2%) among women ages 14 to 49
84% reported no symptoms
Related panels
• High-throughput
• Sensitive/Specific
• Investigation of vaginal infections by evaluating a large
panel of pathogenic and commensal organisms
– Syndromic testing
• Faster TAT, without subjectivity associated with culture
• Operational efficiency
• Integrated, pre-microbiome
Conclusion
• Charles P. Cartwright et al. Development and Validation of a Semiquantitative,
Multitarget PCR Assay for Diagnosis of Bacterial Vaginosis. J Clin Microbiol. 2012
Jul;50(7):2321-9.
• Srinivasan et al. Bacterial communities in women with bacterial vaginosis: high
resolution phylogenetic analyses reveal relationships of microbiota to clinical criteria.
PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e37818.
• van de Wijgert JH et al. The vaginal microbiota: what have we learned after a decade of
molecular characterization? PLoS One. 2014 Aug 22;9(8):e105998.
• Ma B et al. Vaginal microbiome: rethinking health and disease. Annu Rev
Microbiol. 2012;66:371-89.
References
• Pranil Chandra, DO, FCAP, FASCP
• Scott Wheeler, PhD
• James Prescott, PhD
• Zeq Ma, PhD
• Mathew Rodgers
• Criziel Quinn
• Vickie Clinard
• Joni Williams
• Melody Hedjnal
• Dustin Murdock
Acknowledgements
The world leader in serving science
Kelly Li, PhD
Associate Director, Clinical R&D, Genetic Sciences Division
Microfluidics qPCR Solution for Respiratory Pathogen Detection
Nov 7th, 2018
Webinar: The Impact of Flexible Panel-Based Solutions for Pathogen Detection
47
Applied Biosystems - Microbial Detection Solutions
End to end solution approach for supporting pathogen testing
INSTRUMENTATIONCombining flexible throughput capabilities with a streamlined
workflow
PLATFORMForm factors to suit different sample number, target number and throughput needs
CONSUMABLESSupporting workflow reagents including controls, sample prep, master mixes
COVERAGEAllows to select clinical
research studies and population demographics relevant genomic targets
SERVICE & SUPPORTInstrument OQ/IQ/PV, training and support your analytical validation
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
48
Vaginal Microbiota
Collection of 34 Pathogens (24 Bacteria, 7 Fungi, 1 Protozoa, 2 Virus)www.thermofisher.com/vm
Urinary Tract Microbiota
Collection of 17 Pathogens (16 Bacteria, 1 Fungi)www.thermofisher.com/utm
Uro-Genital Pathogen Detection Solutions on Nanofluidics
The traditional tools (i.e. culture) in these areas are inadequate, providing an opportunity for molecular solutions to
address current pain points
Current solution
includes optimized
protocols for sample
prep and qPCR
workflows as well as
synthetic controls
and master mix.
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
49
Building a Throughput Continuum for Customizable Pathogen Detection
Sample Tested
Ta
rgets
Te
ste
d
10 20 40
10
50
200
24-48 Targets
6-16 Samples
18-56 Targets
20-48 Samples
Microfluidics
TaqMan® Array Card
Nanofluidics
TaqMan® OpenArray
33 nl rx volume1 ul rx volume
• Pre-spotted
Arrays
• High-throughput
• Customization
18-56 Targets
192 Samples
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
50
TAC has over 50 peer reviewed publications on microbial detection
covering clinical research and epidemiological studies
Performance ProficiencyHigh Sensitivity and Specificity
Cost EffectivenessAligned to acceptable payment by users
Ease of UseFast and easy setup in a closed system
Coverage FlexibilityChoice of target aligned to need
Flexible Microfluidic Solution
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
51
Groundbreaking ANISA Study Using Microfluidic Card (Saha et al, 2018)
Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation funded study
published in Lancet
investigates incidence of
community-acquired infections
caused by specific organisms
among neonates in 3rd world
countries. More than half a
million neonatal deaths per
year results from possible
serious bacterial infections
(pSBIs) which is investigated
in this study using blood
cultures and TAC platform
Lancet 2018 v392: p145–59
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
52
Microfluidic Card Workflow
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
Ease of use enabled through a close system
53
Flu Common Symptoms
Targeted Species for Respiratory Tract Microbiota (RTM)
3rd Leading Cause of Mortality
The Leading Cause of
Pediatric Hospital Admissions
A Primary Danger for the Immuno-compromised
Multiple Pathogens
Overlapping Symptoms
28 viral targetsAdenovirus
Bocavirus
Coronavirus 229E
Coronavirus HKU1
Coronavirus NL63
Coronavirus OC43
Enterovirus
HHV3 (Varicella Zoster Virus)HHV4 (Epstein-Barr Virus)
HHV5 (Cytomegalovirus)
Human Herpesvirus 6
Human Metapneumovirus
Influenza A H1-2009
Influenza A H3
Influenza A pan
Influenza-B
Measles
MERS_CoV
Mumps
Parainfluenza virus 1
Parainfluenza virus 2
Parainfluenza virus 3
Parainfluenza virus 4
Parechovirus
Respiratory Syncytial Virus A
Respiratory Syncytial Virus B
Rhinovirus
SARS_CoV
12 Bacterial TargetsBordetella (PAN)
Bordetella holmesii
Bordetella pertussis
Chlamydophila pneumoniae
Coxiella burnetii
Haemophilus Influenzae
Klebsiella pneumoniae
Legionella pneumoniae
Moraxella catarrhalis
Mycoplasma pneumoniae
Streptococcus pneumoniae
Staphylococcus aureus
3 ControlsIC Bacillus Atropheus
IC Rnase P
IC Xeno
1 Fungal TargetPneumocystis jiroveci
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
54
Example of Microfluidic Card Layout
Adenovirus 1of2 1
Adenovirus 2of2 2
Bocavirus 3
HHV3 (VZV) 4
HHV4 (EBV) 5
HHV5 (CMV) 6
HHV6 7
Influenza A virus (pan) 8
Influenza A H1 9
Influenza A H3 10
IC 18S rRNA 11
Influenza_B 12
hPIV1 13
hPIV2 14
hPIV3 15
hPIV4 16
RSVA 17
RSVB 18
hMPV 19
Measles 20
Coronavirus_229E 21
Coronavirus_HKU1 22
Coronavirus_NL63 23
Coronavirus_OC43 24
25 Mumps
26 MERS_CoV
27 SARS_CoV
28 Enterovirus (pan)
29 Enterovirus_D68
30 Rhinovirus 1of2
31 Rhinovirus 2of2
32 Parechovirus
33 IC Xeno
34 Bordetella (pan)
35 B_holmesii
36 B_pertussis
37 C_burnetii
38 C_pneumoniae
39 H_influenzae
40 K_ pneumoniae
41 L_pneumophila
42 M_catarrhalis
43 M_pneumoniae
44 S_aureus
45 S_pneumoniae
46 P_jirovecii
47 IC B_atropheus
48 IC RNase P
Available for early access
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
Xeno RNA can be used as
a process control
Bacillus atropheus can be
used as an end to end
workflow control
55
1 card x 6 per day
Reporting Run real-time PCRAnalysis
Sample prep RT & Sample ProcessingSample type: NT swabs
Sample-to-Answer Workflow for RTM
Thermo Scientific™ KingFisher™ Flex system
with Applied Biosystems™ MagMAX kits
Applied Biosystems™ ProFlex™ 96-well PCR
System for RT
1.5
hr
Service and support
available throughout
the entire process
Total Turnaround Time
5.5 Hours / Run
Up to 6
runs
per day
Respiratory Pathogen Detection Assays
1
hr
<2
Hrs
Data Analysis
In-house LIMS or CLS
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
56
Analytical Sensitivity for RTM Assays Using Synthetic Template on TAC
10
15
20
25
30
35
10^1 10^2 10^3 10^4 10^5 10^6
y=-3.3936x+34.542
R²=0.99911
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 2 4 6 8
Flu_A_H1_2009
y=-3.3361x+34.993
R²=0.99973
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 2 4 6 8
Flu_A_H3
y=-3.3859x+33.642
R²=0.99988
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 2 4 6 8
Flu_A_pan
y=-3.2487x+34.134
R²=0.99981
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 2 4 6 8
Flu_B
y=-3.3506x+34.995
R²=0.9999
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 2 4 6 8
RSV_A
y=-3.4199x+35.096
R²=0.99939
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 2 4 6 8
RSV_B
Assays R2
Slope
PCR
Efficiency
Adenovirus_pan_1 0.9993 -3.37 98.1%
Adenovirus_pan_2 0.9996 -3.30 100.8%
Bocavirus 0.9997 -3.36 98.4%
Bordetella_holm 0.9997 -3.29 101.3%
Bordetella_pan 0.9998 -3.35 99.0%
Bordetella_pert 1.0000 -3.33 99.6%
Chlamyd_pneumoniae 1.0000 -3.34 99.3%
Coronavirus_229E 0.9999 -3.35 98.8%
Coronavirus_HKU1 0.9999 -3.44 95.2%
Coronavirus_NL63 0.9997 -3.42 96.2%
Coronavirus_OC43 0.9999 -3.40 97.0%
Coxiella_burneti 0.9993 -3.39 97.3%
Cytomegalovirus 0.9999 -3.35 98.9%
Enterovirus_D68 0.9997 -3.37 98.1%
Enterovirus_pan 0.9999 -3.35 98.9%
Epstein-Barr 0.9993 -3.34 99.3%
Flu_A_H1_2009 0.9991 -3.39 97.1%
Flu_A_H3 0.9997 -3.34 99.4%
Flu_A_pan 0.9999 -3.39 97.4%
Flu_B 0.9998 -3.25 103.1%
HaemophilusInfluenzae 0.9996 -3.41 96.4%
HHV-6 0.9999 -3.43 95.7%
hMPV 0.9994 -3.33 99.5%
Legionella_pneumoniae 0.9997 -3.32 100.0%
M_catarrhalis 0.9999 -3.41 96.5%
Measles 0.9989 -3.41 96.3%
MERS-CoV 0.9987 -3.39 97.3%
Mumps 0.9999 -3.31 100.6%
Mycoplas_pneumoniae 0.9988 -3.33 99.7%
Parainfluenza_1 1.0000 -3.31 100.4%
Parainfluenza_2 1.0000 -3.34 99.4%
Parainfluenza_3 0.9994 -3.35 99.0%
Parainfluenza_4 0.9999 -3.24 103.7%
Parechovirus 0.9998 -3.25 102.9%
Pneumocystisjirovecii 0.9998 -3.35 99.0%
Rhinovirus_A 0.9998 -3.30 100.8%
Rhinovirus_B_C 0.9996 -3.29 101.5%
RSV_A 0.9999 -3.35 98.8%
RSV_B 0.9994 -3.42 96.1%
SARS 0.9999 -3.37 98.1%
Staphylococcusaureus 0.9993 -3.34 99.4%
Strep_pneumoniae 1.0000 -3.35 98.7%
VZV 0.9996 -3.35 98.9%
• Serial dilution was done w/ synthetic control
• Similar results were obtained from Synthetic
RNA and ATCC gDNA / gRNA controls
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
57
RTM Assay Specificity with ATCC gDNA and gRNA Controls
Assays/Controls
Humanadenovirus2
Humanadenovirus7
Humanadenovirus12
Bord
etellabro
nch
isepetica
Bord
etellaparapertussis
Bord
etellaholm
esii
Bord
etellapertussis
Chlamydophila
pneumoniae
Chlamydophila
pneumoniae
Humancoro
navirus
229E
Betaco
ronavirus1
strainO
C43
HumanH
erp
esvirus5
HCM
V
Entero
virusD68
(US/KY/14-18953)
Entero
virusD68
(US/M
O/14-18947)
Haemophilusinfluenza
e
Influenza
Avirus(H
1N1)
strainA/
Influenza
Avirus(H
3N2)
Influenza
Bvirus
Kiebsiellapneumoniae
Legionellapneumophila
Measlesvirus
Moraxellacatarrhalis
Mumpsvirus
Myco
plasm
apneumoniae
Parainfluenza
PIV-1
Parainfluenza
PIV-2
Parainfluenza
PIV-3
Parainfluenza
PIV-4
Humanresp
irato
rySyncy
tial
Virus
Humanresp
irato
rySyncy
tial
Virus
Humanrhinovirus17
Staphyloco
ccusaureus
Strepto
coccuspneumoniae
Humanherp
esvirus3
Adenovirus_pan_1 21.8 20.4
Adenovirus_pan_2 20.7 21.0
Bordetella_pan 23.9 22.7 22.4
B_holmesii 22.6
B_pertussis 22.6
C_pneumoniae 22.3 20.2
Coronavirus_229E 22.6
Coronavirus_OC43 21.7
HHV5_CMV 20.1
Enterovirus_D68 23.6 23.6
Enterovirus_pan 28.4
H_influenzae 19.7
Influenza_A_H1 23.2
Influenza_A_pan 20.7 22.6
Influenza_B 21.6
K_pneumoniae 20.1
L_pneumophila 20.8
Measles 21.6
M_catarrhalis 20.9
Mumps 23.0
M_pneumoniae 20.7
PIV_1 22.0
PIV_2 22.1
PIV_3 21.4
PIV_4 20.4
RSVA 20.0
RSVB 28.5 21.8
Rhinovirus_pan_1 25.5
S_aureus 20.1
S_pneumoniae 19.0
HHV3_VZV 20.7
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
No significant off-target or cross-species activity was observed.
58
• Applied Biosystems offers an end to end solution for
supporting pathogen testing
• We currently offer microbial detection solutions for uro-genital
pathogens on nanofluidics platform
• Microbial detection solutions for respiratory tract microbiota on
microfluidics platform allows customization of both the size
and content of the panel.
• The RTM panel demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity
• Our solution offers a simple workflow, fast turnaround time
and high throughput with flexible sample/target combinations.
Summary
Nanofluidics platform
Microfluidics platform
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.
The world leader in serving science
Thank you
For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures. © 2018 Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of Thermo Fisher Scientific
and its subsidiaries unless otherwise specified. TaqMan is a registered trademark of Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., used under permission and license. COL15382 0218
Recommended